Koran is "prescribed material" for Leaving Cert Arabic.

recedite

A requirement that all students who sit the Arabic exam in the Leaving Cert must study the Koran is to be reviewed by education authorities.
Ever since the subject was introduced to the Leaving Cert in 2004, extracts from the “Holy Koran” have been prescribed material for all candidates.
However, a Syrian father whose Christian daughter is due to sit the exam says the requirement is unfair for students and discriminatory....

From Irish Times
This is what happens when religious authorities are allowed to get involved in setting state exams and curricula.

I suppose in fairness to the Dept of education, there is no really "secular" arabic authority to go to. A small number of religious authority figures at the mosques tend to give the impression that they represent the Arabic speaking community in Ireland. Even the embassies of Arabic speaking countries cannot be considered entirely secular, as they generally do not have a complete separation of church and state in those countries.

But now that the Dept. of Education is aware of the issue, lets hope they act swiftly to remedy the situation.

One eyed Jack

You read your own article surely?


"In a statement, the State body for development subject material, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA), said the Koran was included on the basis of its linguistic and literary value and not because of its association with religion.

It said the requirement for questions based on the Koran are explicitly stated in the syllabus.

In the Arabic exam, candidates are presented with three texts: an extract from the Koran, a portion of Arabic verse and an extract from a work of modern Arabic prose.

The questions related to the Koran are mandatory for all candidates, while candidates may choose from a portion of verse and modern prose."


This case has as much to do with discrimination as King Lear being prescribed material for the English exam is discriminatory to teenagers who only understand txt spk.

eviltwin

That's the only book they could pick? Really??

lazygal

King Lear is a religious text now?

galljga1

I was hoping the heading was a misprint and it actually should have been "proscribed".

Orion

One eyed Jack wrote: »

"In a statement, the State body for development subject material, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA), said the Koran was included on the basis of its linguistic and literary value and not because of its association with religion.
...
This case has as much to do with discrimination as King Lear being prescribed material for the English exam is discriminatory to teenagers who only understand txt spk.

Would you equally agree with the Bible being mandatory reading in the English syllabus? That statement from the NCCA is crap. A religious text should not be part of a language syllabus. There are other books they could use.

One eyed Jack

lazygal wrote: »

King Lear is a religious text now?

It was an analogy to demonstrate that the use of the Koran in the context of an examination of the Arabic language is as discriminatory as using Shakespeare in an English exam.

If you prefer then, it's as discriminatory to an atheist using the Bible in an English exam. It's not being used in a religious context, but simply because it's one of the most widely known books in the English language, the same as the Koran is in the Arabic language.

One eyed Jack

Orion wrote: »

Would you equally agree with the Bible being mandatory reading in the English syllabus? That statement from the NCCA is crap. A religious text should not be part of a language syllabus. There are other books they could use.

I'm not seeing how it would be discriminatory if that's what you mean? It's considered one of the most important and influential works in many different languages, and is considered in it's historical context by historians.

The way I see this going is the same way some universities are going introducing trigger warning nonsense and excusing students from studying important and influential works of literature. Imagine parsing the complete works of Shakespeare through a trigger warning lens? You wouldn't be left with enough material for an A4 page! :pac:

Cherry Blossom

Was there not a higher Irish paper once where the LC candidates were asked to write about the popes visit to Ireland or did I dream that up?

Absolam

Orion wrote: »

Would you equally agree with the Bible being mandatory reading in the English syllabus? That statement from the NCCA is crap. A religious text should not be part of a language syllabus. There are other books they could use.

It came up on the other thread, but the KJV would be a useful text for someone studying 17th/18th century English; even if to my mind it would be hard to hold modern Bibles up as examples of literary excellence. The Quran is thought by scholars to be a literary achievement in it's own right, and it's certainly the most notable literary work in Arabic; unlike the Bible there is at least in theory only one version of it as well.

I don't think a religious text should be excluded from a language syllabus simply because it's a religious text, but I'd agree a religious text should only be included if it has value as a literary text. Or are we now to exclude Carravaggios, Rembrandts, Ruebens and Michelangelos compositions from Art studies, and Bachs, Mozarts and Vivaldis works from Music studies, simply because their subjects were religious?

Cabaal

Absolam wrote: »

I don't think a religious text should be excluded from a language syllabus simply because it's a religious text,

Its good to know that you are so supportive of allowing Scientology books as part of the language syllabus,

magicbastarder

Absolam wrote: »

I don't think a religious text should be excluded from a language syllabus simply because it's a religious text

two things smell rotten here; 1) the fact that it has been included, and 2) it's the only mandatory question.

making it mandatory that anyone should have to study text of a religion which they have no faith in is the most impossibly idiotic thing to do. i'm genuinely wondering if the NCCA made their claim about literary merit without their own toes curling.

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

Its good to know that you are so supportive of allowing Scientology books as part of the language syllabus,

Are there Scientology books that you think have literary value? I mean To The Stars was an ok novel, but I don't think there's much in Scientology literature that anyone would consider worthy of a literary award. Do you?

seamus

Absolam wrote: »

Are there Scientology books that you think have literary value? I mean To The Stars was an ok novel, but I don't think there's much in Scientology literature that anyone would consider worthy of a literary award. Do you?

I don't think the Koran is going to be winning many literary awards either.

There is cultural benefit perhaps in studying certain texts from a language history point of view. Hence why we do Shakespeare.

Does the Koran fit this bill? Did it have a profound effect on the Arabic language?

I don't know the answer to that.

I would have a concern if the curriculum refers to the book as the "Holy" Koran or otherwise makes any deference to it. I would also be concerned if students were required to read it or part of it in advance of the exam.

Putting in extracts of it though and asking students to answer questions on that extract to gauge their arabic comprehension, I wouldn't be too concerned about. It comes across as lazy by the exam-setters. Couldn't be arsed trying to find anything else, let's just stick the Koran in here, don't have to pay royalties or anything.

Absolam

magicbastarder wrote: »

two things smell rotten here; 1) the fact that it has been included, and 2) it's the only mandatory question.

I think we can dismiss 1) as just general prejudice, but 2) in fairness is simply wrong. There are six mandatory questions in Part 1, five in Part 3, one in Part 4, and in Part 3 Section 1 has two questions on excerpts from the Quran which are mandatory, and Section 2 and 3 have four questions each; it is mandatory that students complete either Section 2 or 3. That sounds a bit less dodgy than 'it's the only mandatory question', doesn't it?

magicbastarder wrote: »

making it mandatory that anyone should have to study text of a religion which they have no faith in is the most impossibly idiotic thing to do. i'm genuinely wondering if the NCCA made their claim about literary merit without their own toes curling.

Removing religious material from education simply because it doesn't accord with your point of view, now that's an impossibly idiotic thing to do. If the NCCA were alone in claiming the Quran has literary merit it might be concerning. But it's apparent they're not; according to Middle East, A History it is 'the finest piece of literature in the arabic language', a sentiment wikipedia also attributes to 'The Qur'an' by Alan Jones, and 'The Koran Interpreted' by A. Arberry..

silverharp

pasted from other thread, no point having a parallel discussion

Absolam wrote: »

Why? Whether the text has literary value (particularly in Arabic) has nothing at all to do with whether or not it is reasonably common to include religious texts in foreign language exams in western secondary schools.

on the basis that most languages have interesting religious documents attached to their language, Im just asking why here but we don't see it elsewhere , It's a question the dept ought to answer. I'd suspect that it was done for religious advancement in the way that religious people find it difficult to not advance their cause at every turn. If an Arab speaker is shocked to find the Quran in their exam then it doesn't seem to be a taken for granted part of studying Arabic

Absolam wrote: »

We don't have any reason to think the exam does though, do we? No one has yet shown that the questions aren't entirely based on the literary content of the passages. In fact, given that Muslim students would have a theological understanding of the texts, they might be at a disadvantage in trying to discuss them from a purely literary standpoint. It very much depends on the questions, do you not think?

The Quran is written in classical Arabic so someone who has been brought up with it will be more familiar with the style. Other foreign languages are presented as modern, nobody is required to understand 1300 year old French or Spanish documents to get through a modern language exam here.
Originally this subject was setup for point bagging purposes for Libyan students in the Institute, as time goes on the mix has changed so I assume more kids have or will be born here. Personally I think it would be better to present the language in the Irish Syllabus as not being inextricably linked to a particular religion. There are obviously Christian Arabs and I'd guess Jewish Arab speakers that have learned the language without reference to the Quran, do they have to come to Ireland to have their first experience with the Quran?

Absolam

seamus wrote: »

I don't think the Koran is going to be winning many literary awards either. There is cultural benefit perhaps in studying certain texts from a language history point of view. Hence why we do Shakespeare.

I think it won't find much favour in many western book clubs, true. And I agree there are cultural benefits in stufying Shakespeare, but there are lingusitic benefits too, and not historical; the degree of understanding we can bring to bear on modern language is enormous. And Arabic has changed less over that time than English has; the construction of ancient Arabic (I'm told) is far more readily and widely recognisable to modern Arab speakers than the equivalent language used at the time in Britain would be.

seamus wrote: »

Does the Koran fit this bill? Did it have a profound effect on the Arabic language? I don't know the answer to that.

Nor I;but I wouldn't be willing to dismiss it from consideration simply for being a religious text.

seamus wrote: »

I would have a concern if the curriculum refers to the book as the "Holy" Koran or otherwise makes any deference to it. I would also be concerned if students were required to read it or part of it in advance of the exam.

I wouldn't; the Bible is commonly referred to as the Holy Bible and I feel it shows respect for those who value it to use the the title they prefer. I'd happily show similar respect for those who value the Quran in a simple matter of titles.

seamus wrote: »

Putting in extracts of it though and asking students to answer questions on that extract to gauge their arabic comprehension, I wouldn't be too concerned about. It comes across as lazy by the exam-setters. Couldn't be arsed trying to find anything else, let's just stick the Koran in here, don't have to pay royalties or anything.

Maybe. There may not be a huge amount of decent literature in Arabic with a comprehension level suitable for Leaving Cert exams.. Peig once again floats horribly to mind.

Absolam

silverharp wrote: »

on the basis that most languages have interesting religious documents attached to their language, Im just asking why here but we don't see it elsewhere , It's a question the dept ought to answer.

I really don't see why it should? The Dept hasn't said anything at all about choosing the book on the basis that it's an interesting religious document attached to the language.

silverharp wrote: »

I'd suspect that it was done for religious advancement in the way that religious people find it difficult to not advance their cause at every turn. If an Arab speaker is shocked to find the Quran in their exam then it doesn't seem to be a taken for granted part of studying Arabic

If you had any substantiation for that suspicion it might be interesting, but is there any basis for it other than the fact that the book is on the syllabus and you have a poor opinion of other people? The notion that an Arab speaker was shocked to find it in their exam is a bit slippery too; the students father said that he was distressed that it was there, not that he was shocked. Nor has anyone proposed that it should be taken for granted that the Quran is part of studying Arabic, have they?

silverharp wrote: »

The Quran is written in classical Arabic so someone who has been brought up with it will be more familiar with the style. Other foreign languages are presented as modern, nobody is required to understand 1300 year old French or Spanish documents to get through a modern language exam here.

That pre-supposes that the variation between 'classical' and 'modern' Arabic are as substantial as they are in other languages that have evolved in rather different circumstances. I'm not so sure that this is the case.

silverharp wrote: »

Originally this subject was setup for point bagging purposes for Libyan students in the Institute, as time goes on the mix has changed so I assume more kids have or will be born here. Personally I think it would be better to present the language in the Irish Syllabus as not being inextricably linked to a particular religion. There are obviously Christian Arabs and I'd guess Jewish Arab speakers that have learned the language without reference to the Quran, do they have to come to Ireland to have their first experience with the Quran?

That may be so; I'm sure you'll present your sources if you think it's worth supporting. But I don't think the notion that the language is inextricably linked to a particular religion has any value; no more than the notion that Art History is inextricably linked to a particular religion by including paintings with religious subjects. Nor am I inclined to be concerned that anyone's first experience with the Quran will be their Leaving Cert, whether they're native Arabic speakers, Christians, Jews, or atheists; I'm sure the Leaving Cert will be their first experience with many things.

Cabaal

Seems its important, but not important enough to be kept as compulsory and is likely to be made optional next year now

John Hammond, deputy chief executive of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, said that the Koran was included because of its literary and linguistic value rather than its religious value.

The NCCA said that it received a complaint from a Christian parent of a student, contesting the assumption that all Arabic students were Muslims and had a knowledge of the Koran.

Eight separate sections of the Koran are identified as prescribed texts in the exam.

“The council is willing to address the issue that it is compulsory and will look into making it optional for the next school year,” Mr Hammond said.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/04/20/inshallah-2/

Religious texts should never be compulsory to people of other faiths or non-faiths, by all means make them compulsory for people of that specific faith but not others.

Bristolscale7

Maybe they have to use the Koran because Macaulay was right?:rolleyes:

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

Seems its important, but not important enough to be kept as compulsory and is likely to be made optional next year now
Religious texts should never be compulsory to people of other faiths or non-faiths, by all means make them compulsory for people of that specific faith but not others.

I can't see any reason not to have them just as compulsory as any other non religious text, so long as the texts are equally relevant to the subject.

seamus

Absolam wrote: »

I wouldn't; the Bible is commonly referred to as the Holy Bible

Only by those who consider it so.

Adjectives are used to describe objects. The adjective describes either a factual property of the object, or a opinion-based property.

The "large" book is a factual property
The "great" book is a opinion-based property.

Use of the word "Holy" before any text implies the author believes that to be the case, and should not be used as an adjective in a state-set exam. It is disrespectful of a believer to expect non-believers to use the word "Holy" before the name of a text.

Cabaal

Absolam wrote: »

I can't see any reason not to have them just as compulsory as any other non religious text, so long as the texts are equally relevant to the subject.

because they are religious and not everyone wants to read about religious teachings, its really that simple. Its perfectly reasonable to expect that those views should be respected.

Your posts at this stage are just plane silly and you have to question why you seem to defend this nonsense at any cost to people of other faiths or none.

Akrasia

I'm an atheist and I don't care if the Koran is prescribed or not. It's an important cultural document relevant to the Arab world in particular.

As long as they're not teaching it as a religious text, or prohibiting criticism of it as a text. If any student received low marks or suffered any kind of disciplinary action because they criticised the content or style of the text It would be a completely different kettle of fish.

It would be interesting to see how the essays are graded if someone didn't engage with the text in an intelligent way, but merely venerated it because of their religion

"Critically assess the themes in the below text"
"Allah, peace be upon him, is great, therefore everything in the text below is true and beyond human reproach'

If an answer like that was given high marks out of 'respect' for their beliefs, it would be just as outrageous as someone getting low marks for raising valid but critical questions on the themes in the text.

Methinks the actual texts in the course are extracts specially selected to be as non-controversial as possible Are there any bits in the Koran that talk about how wet water is? They're probably the texts that are included.

Cabaal

Akrasia wrote: »

I'm an atheist and I don't care if the Koran is prescribed or not. It's an important cultural document relevant to the Arab world in particular.

But the importance comes from the fact that it is seen as the word of god, this means the viewpoint of it is flawed as its wrong to doubt god.

One eyed Jack

Cabaal wrote: »

But the importance comes from the fact that it is seen as the word of god, this means the viewpoint of it is flawed as its wrong to doubt god.

It is seen as the word of God by adherents of the religion it's relevant to. Anyone else, they may discern their own relevance from it. That's the whole point of including literature like the Quran/Koran on the Arabic syllabus - because it's examining a student's understanding and comprehension of Arabic, not religion. Religion is a completely separate exam subject.

Absolam

seamus wrote: »

Only by those who consider it so. Adjectives are used to describe objects. The adjective describes either a factual property of the object, or a opinion-based property. The "large" book is a factual property
The "great" book is a opinion-based property. Use of the word "Holy" before any text implies the author believes that to be the case, and should not be used as an adjective in a state-set exam. It is disrespectful of a believer to expect non-believers to use the word "Holy" before the name of a text.

In fairness, those who consider it so are in fact, fairly common.
As to the adjective; perhaps it's not quite as you think?
Whilst I'm not sure it actually is disrespectful of a believer to expect non-believers to use the word "Holy" before the name of a text, I'm fairly sure no such expectation was offered; the word is used and I said I feel it shows respect for those who value it to use the the title they prefer. Nobody said anyone was expected to use it.

Cabaal

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It is seen as the word of God by adherents of the religion it's relevant to. Anyone else, they may discern their own relevance from it. That's the whole point of including literature like the Quran/Koran on the Arabic syllabus - because it's examining a student's understanding and comprehension of Arabic, not religion. Religion is a completely separate exam subject.

So the bible should be included in English classes....you know...to test people's understanding and comprehension of English
:rolleyes:

Far more logical to use a none religious text especially for people of none-faith or other faiths,

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

because they are religious and not everyone wants to read about religious teachings, its really that simple. Its perfectly reasonable to expect that those views should be respected.

I didn't want to read about Peig, that was really that simple too. Are you saying it was perfectly reasonable to expect that those views should be respected? Or is it just views against religion that should be respected?

Cabaal wrote: »

Your posts at this stage are just plane silly and you have to question why you seem to defend this nonsense at any cost to people of other faiths or none.

It seems a recurring refrain I'm afraid; when you can't offer a point you offer some generic condemnation instead. Oh well.

BoJack Horseman

Will killing a Kafir be part of the practicals?

Akrasia

Cabaal wrote: »

But the importance comes from the fact that it is seen as the word of god, this means the viewpoint of it is flawed as its wrong to doubt god.

The importance of it, that it is seen of the word of god, is why it's important to both believers and non believers. And this is why it's valid to teach it in an arabic class. But the way that it is taught should be as a piece of literature and the associated impact it has had on art and society.

This is my line in the sand. I'm happy for it to be taught as long as it's treated the same as any other text on the curriculum

I would be much happier teaching the Koran as literature in an arabic class, than teaching it in a religious education class, where there is more likely to be a rule barring 'insensitive criticism' or something similar.

If the Arabic class is anything like English, then students are required to engage with the text and provide their own insights and interpretations on the themes of the text.

Whether this happens in practise is another story, but if there are non Muslim students who are being discriminated against because of their honest and well thought out criticism of the text on their course, then they should definitely raise this as it is unacceptable.

The marking scheme is published for the LC papers. Problem is they're in Arabic (who'd have thunk it)
http://papers.theleavingcert.com/arabic/higher/2015-exam-paper.pdf
http://papers.theleavingcert.com/arabic/higher/2015-marking-scheme.pdf
Does anyone on here speak Arabic to be able to see if there are any glaring biases in how the paper is marked?

Akrasia

Cabaal wrote: »

So the bible should be included in English classes....you know...to test people's understanding and comprehension of English
:rolleyes:

Far more logical to use a none religious text especially for people of none-faith or other faiths,

I'd actually love to see certain passages on the bible opened up to a hundred thousand teenagers to critically analyse as a literary text.. There'd probably be some legendary answers.

Cabaal

Akrasia wrote: »

I'd actually love to see certain passages on the bible opened up to a hundred thousand teenagers to critically analyse as a literary text.. There'd probably be some legendary answers.

As would I, but during religion class,
Can't see it happening though

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

But the importance comes from the fact that it is seen as the word of god, this means the viewpoint of it is flawed as its wrong to doubt god.

Not, apparently, to some, who think it is the finest piece of literature in the Arabic language. For them the importance seems to be it's fineness as a piece of literature. Sounds like a good reason to include it in studies of Arabic literature.

Cabaal wrote: »

So the bible should be included in English classes....you know...to test people's understanding and comprehension of English:rolleyes:

If there's a bible that is generally considered to be a great piece of literature, sure, why not Actually, isn't the Song of Solomon supposed to be one of the greatest love poems of all time? I don't know if it suffers greatly in translation to English, but perhaps there is some merit to the notion that some excerpted passages from the (Holy) Bible are worth including in literature classes.

Cabaal wrote: »

Far more logical to use a none religious text especially for people of none-faith or other faiths,

Far more logical to base selection on the quality of literature, rather than the mere presence or absence of religious content, which, in all fairness, isn't terribly relevant to the subject of literature.

One eyed Jack

Cabaal wrote: »

So the bible should be included in English classes....you know...to test people's understanding and comprehension of English
:rolleyes:

If it were an examination of Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek languages then I might expect the Bible would be mandatory reading.

English? Not so much, as the Bible isn't originally written in english. It has been translated into english.

Far more logical to use a none religious text especially for people of none-faith or other faiths,

How exactly is the candidates religion or none even relevant in their study of a particular language?

CIARAN_BOYLE

One eyed Jack wrote: »

How exactly is the candidates religion or none even relevant in their study of a particular language?

Because a candidate of a certain faith would be expected to be familiar with the course material prior to commencing study.

TheChizler

Interestingly the Bible is included in part of the Latin LC curriculum, I think as an option.

https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Curriculum-and-Syllabus/Senior-Cycle-/Syllabuses-and-Guidelines/lc_latin_sy.pdf

One eyed Jack

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Because a candidate of a certain faith would be expected to be familiar with the course material prior to commencing study.

Candidates aren't being tested on their faith in a language exam though?

That's the fundamental issue I have with any claims that the exam is discriminatory to a candidate based upon their religion or none - because it isn't relevant. If I were studying Arabic, I would expect the Koran would be a relevant text, regardless of it's religious connotations or otherwise.

robindch

TheChizler wrote: »

Interestingly the Bible is included in part of the Latin LC curriculum, I think as an option.

And it's included in the Ancient Greek curriculum as well, or at least, used to be.

FWIW, including it is/was useful since - compared to the literary works of Plato, Aristophanes, Herodotus and the rest - the Koine Greek used in the NT is really quite easy to understand - limited vocabulary, simple grammar, uncomplicated story-line. Even the gospel of John, which is by the most polished of all the gospels in Greek, isn't a soggy patch on Plato.

oldrnwisr

Just one minor point about this.
It is entirely possible that the passages from the Quran were included for sound academic reasons. While the concept of i'jaz (the inimitability or uniqueness of the Quran) is a Muslim belief, the idea that the Quran is noteworthy among Arabic literature is something that is supported by a number of Western scholars too.
In "A History of God", Karen Armstrong writes:

"It is as though Muhammad had created an entirely new literary form that some people were not ready for but which thrilled others. Without this experience of the Koran, it is extremely unlikely that Islam would have taken root."

Similarly, Oliver Leaman, professor of Judaic Studies at University of Kentucky noted:

"...the verses of the Qur'an represent its uniqueness and beauty not to mention its novelty and originality. That is why it has succeeded in convincing so many people of its truth. it imitates nothing and no one nor can it be imitated. Its style does not pall even after long periods of study and the text does not lose its freshness over time"


Furthermore, the syllabus shows that the questions about the Quran are contained in a section which also includes questions on either Arabic poetry or modern Arabic prose. This indicates that there is likely to be some kind of comparative question between the older text and newer ones. This is a pretty uncontroversial idea since the LC English curriculum includes (or at least included when I did my LC) middle English in the form of The Canterbury Tales as well as modern English.

Also, I don't really see what the problem is with including a religious text in a literature course is in the first place. The students are being asked to read it and answer questions, not believe what they're reading. Back in the day when I did LC English we had Paradise Lost to contend with which is a quasi religious text. It doesn't mean any of us came away from the LC believing in Satan because of it.

I can't think of a good reason to exclude religious texts from a literature course at all. Ignorance is a bad thing IMO. If reading an extract from the Quran gives you a better insight into Islam all the better regardless of whether you have a different religion or none at all. People would be better off if they understood better what different religions actually teach instead of what they think it does. Religion survives in part on ignorance. Lots of religious people and most of the ones I've come across in real life don't know the first thing about what their own religion actually teaches. I'm an atheist in part because I've read the Bible, the Quran, the Guru Granth Sahib, the Book of Mormon, the Baghavad Gita because reading what a different religion believes is not something to shy away from or be fearful of. It's difficult to argue with someone who claims their religion is true if you don't know the first thing about their religion. As Penn Jillette says below, reading the Bible or the Quran or whatever is the fastest way to become an atheist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3rGev6OZ3w

And another thing, religious texts are very useful in literature courses because of the changes and mistranslations that inevitably happen to these texts over history. For example, the virgin birth prophecy in Matthew's gospel is as good an example of deliberate mistranslation as you'll find in any body of literature.
Similarly, the alteration of Surah 37:103 in the Quran between the Samarkand Codex and the modern text is another example of how the meaning of passages can be changed completely due to copying changes/errors.

130Kph

Absolam wrote: »

I didn't want to read about Peig, that was really that simple too...

On bended knee, I plead with you not to drag the memory of pragmatic yet pessimistic Peig into this Qur'anic quagmire.

Ochón mo croí, hasn’t this poor seanachaí suffered enough in passing through this vale of tears...

robindch

130Kph wrote: »

On bended knee, I plead with you not to drag the memory of pragmatic yet pessimistic Peig into this Qur'anic quagmire.

In defence of a fellow (former) resident of Kerry, I should point out that the edition of Peig which was inflicted upon generations of Irish school kids seems to have been bowdlerized, sanctified and dehumorized to the extent that Myles NaGopaleen wrote his hilarious An Béal Bocht to help satirize it.

Peig herself, so far as history and the library of her recordings at UCD suggests, was a witty and skilled storyteller and probably wouldn't have had much truck with the misery-laden book which bears her name.

recedite

Akrasia wrote: »

It would be interesting to see how the essays are graded if someone didn't engage with the text in an intelligent way, but merely venerated it because of their religion

"Critically assess the themes in the below text"
"Allah, peace be upon him, is great, therefore everything in the text below is true and beyond human reproach'

If an answer like that was given high marks out of 'respect' for their beliefs, it would be just as outrageous as someone getting low marks for raising valid but critical questions on the themes in the text.

That would be interesting alright, and especially the second part; if the student made an intelligent criticism of the Koran, as a literary work.

This is the problem with using any religious text in a non-religious exam. If the text is considered by some (eg the examiner!) to be perfect, and the word of god, then it is difficult or impossible to make an objective study or an objective critique of it.
I wonder who exactly examines these papers anyway? If I was a Syrian Christian with fluent Arabic, sitting a Leaving Cert exam in Ireland, I would not be at all happy answering a question on the Koran if a guy in Clonskeagh mosque was going to be correcting the paper.

Also I find it hard to believe that there is so little merit in the broad lexicon of Arabic literature that the LC exam has no choice but to use such controversial material.

One eyed Jack

recedite wrote: »

That would be interesting alright, and especially the second part; if the student made an intelligent criticism of the Koran, as a literary work.

This is the problem with using any religious text in a non-religious exam. If the text is considered by some (eg the examiner!) to be perfect, and the word of god, then it is difficult or impossible to make an objective study or an objective critique of it.

I wonder who exactly examines these papers anyway? If I was a Syrian Christian with fluent Arabic, sitting a Leaving Cert exam in Ireland, I would not be at all happy answering a question on the Koran if a guy in Clonskeagh mosque was going to be correcting the paper.

The State Examinations Commission recruits teachers for the roles of examiners:

Personal Reflection Task

All suitably qualified teachers are welcome to apply for these positions. Examiners will be selected on the basis of their teaching and assessment experience and qualifications. Full training is provided and a support network is available throughout the marking process.

Applicants for the position must:

hold a third level degree or equivalent
have recent teaching experience in the relevant subject area or related subject
have good organisational and analytical skills
be able to work to a fixed time-scale
be available to work full-time for the duration of the marking
be resident in the Republic of Ireland during the marking period.
To apply, download an application form above, complete and return to “Examiners Section, State Examinations Commission, Cornamaddy, Athlone, Co Westmeath” as soon as possible.

Why become an examiner?

Being an examiner enables you to:

enhance your own teaching
gain a deeper understanding of the assessment process
exercise your professional judgement
network with other professionals
increase your professional development and career prospects
earn extra income.

The role of the examiner

Typically, you will be required to

familiarise yourself with the contents of the Instructions to Examiners booklet
attend a marking conference
collect your allocated scripts for marking
mark the scripts in accordance with the agreed marking scheme
submit scripts to your advising examiner for monitoring
complete the work within a given time period
submit a report at the end of the marking process
A support network is available throughout the marking process.

Marking through Irish

A number of examiners are required in most subjects to mark scripts answered through Irish. Irish translations of the marking schemes are available. There is an additional payment for marking through Irish.

recedite wrote: »

Also I find it hard to believe that there is so little merit in the broad lexicon of Arabic literature that the LC exam has no choice but to use such controversial material.

It's been on the Leaving Cert syllabus in it's current format since 1997:

Leaving Certificate Arabic was offered in Ireland for the first time in June 1997, at Ordinary and Higher levels. The current syllabus is based on the Arabic curriculum taught at secondary school level in the state system of an Arabic-speaking country. The curriculum includes a number of prescribed texts, both religious and secular.

Part 2
Part 2 will consist of three sections. The first section, to be answered by all candidates, will comprise an extract from the Koran, followed by two questions. The second and third sections, between which the
andidates will be asked to choose, will consist respectively of a portion of classical Arabic verse, followed by two questions, and an extract from a work of modern Arabic prose, followed by 2 questions. In both cases, one question will bear directly on the text presented, while the other question will be of a more contextual nature.

Source: Leaving Certificate Arabic Interim Syllabus


There's absolutely nothing controversial about the use of the Koran in learning the Arabic language, any more than there is anything controversial about the use of Shakespeare in learning the English language.


The father's point here seems to be this:

However, a Syrian father whose Christian daughter is due to sit the exam says the requirement is unfair for students and discriminatory.

“She, as a Christian, has never studied the Koran,” said Marwan, who asked that his surname not be used.

It's meant to test the student's knowledge of the Arabic language, not their knowledge of the Islamic religion. That's what the religious education syllabus is for.

meeeeh

TheChizler wrote: »

Interestingly the Bible is included in part of the Latin LC curriculum, I think as an option.

https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Curriculum-and-Syllabus/Senior-Cycle-/Syllabuses-and-Guidelines/lc_latin_sy.pdf

I went to school in another country. We had old Testament in literature. We also mentioned some other religious works, we had Greek literature, we did Romans and so on. I still resent having to read Dante's Divine Comedy but we also did Zola, Tolstoy, Comte, Goethe, Joyce... Bible like anything else was considered part of literal history and was discussed and analized as such. The school was completely secular.

The Randy Riverbeast

It would depend on the way it was studied. No idea what the course involves but if they were taking passages and studying them in terms of how it is written using the language rather than what Allah wanted then I dont see how it can be discrimination. If she is attending the class then they have probably studied the required parts. Probably better to avoid religious texts in schools though. A christian complaining about being discriminated within the Irish school system is a bit odd.

Lurkio

seamus wrote: »

I don't think the Koran is going to be winning many literary awards either.
................

It's a very important text in terms of classical Arabic, which is why they used it, presumably.

recedite

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The State Examinations Commission recruits teachers for the roles of examiners:

Yes, but which teachers? Your average Irish teacher is not going to be competent to correct a LC Arabic paper.
There are only a couple of schools in Ireland which regularly use Arabic in the classroom, and they are all under Islamic control, and closely associated with mosques.
So if teachers from those schools are correcting the paper, how objective are they likely to be when assessing a critique of the Koran that has been written by a kuffar?
F is for fail, and also for fatwa.

One eyed Jack

recedite wrote: »

Yes, but which teachers? Your average Irish teacher is not going to be competent to correct a LC Arabic paper.
There are only a couple of schools in Ireland which regularly use Arabic in the classroom, and they are all under Islamic control, and closely associated with mosques.
So if teachers from those schools are correcting the paper, how objective are they likely to be when assessing a critique of the Koran that has been written by a kuffar?
F is for fail, and also for fatwa.

I would imagine that's why the SEC interviews candidates to determine whether they are suitable for the role of examining the students work in an impartial way, the same as they would have candidates who would be able to examine english, french, german, etc, in an impartial way.

Candidates are not being asked for a critique of the Koran, they are being examined on their comprehension of the Arabic language in which the Koran is written.

F is also for FUD.

Lurkio

recedite wrote: »

Yes, but which teachers? Your average Irish teacher is not going to be competent to correct a LC Arabic paper.
There are only a couple of schools in Ireland which regularly use Arabic in the classroom, and they are all under Islamic control, and closely associated with mosques.
So if teachers from those schools are correcting the paper, how objective are they likely to be when assessing a critique of the Koran that has been written by a kuffar?
F is for fail, and also for fatwa.

You seem to be operating under the notion that this is (a) a theology test and (b) that muslims correspond to some crude stereotype. While it is regrettable that a religious text is used in the context it is, its quite understandable why this is case given the relationship of classical Arabic and the Koran. You are searching for jihadis and extremists in what is a merely an awkward combination of language and religion.

recedite

Lurkio wrote: »

You seem to be operating under the notion that this is (a) a theology test and (b) that muslims correspond to some crude stereotype. ..

And you have no basis whatsoever for saying that.